Romeo<span> is walking in the Capulet backyard the Juliet appears on the balcony. "What light through yonder window breaks?" Romeo asks. He answers his own question after that.</span>
Answer:
1. Cathartic (arousal of emotions)
2. Self-purification
3. Logic and harmony in thoughts.
Explanation: Gandhi was a leader, mentor, and an authority in himself. His ideals are still being used for reference. The way he used to drive the audience mad through his impressive speech pattern and techniques to follow his principles is miraculous. His impressive speech pattern and techniques used to connect to the audience via arousing their emotions (Cathartic in Aristotelian term) as the subjects of his speech are more often dominated by the personal experiences and talks about morality, truth, non-violence, harmony, etc. These subjects developed a sense of credibility and authenticity among the audience towards him. Lastly, <em>his ideals were quite logical and reasonable which made his speech very persuasive in nature</em> and thus, he was successful in delivering his message to his audience's mind and heart throughout.
Don’t click links in this app a lot of people use them to spread viruses and the like. If I were given a drug which extended my lifetime to such a high degree, it would affect my life in many ways. I would consider my plans more loosely and allow myself more time for things; I would plan my career slowly and take my time to learn and do what I want rather than forcing myself to choose a career young. I’d experiment and find out what I like; if I have a dream job I’d go for it when, otherwise, I would’ve chosen something more stable. I would probably still get married although I’d be more careful, as I’d live long enough to see them die and have to live without them the rest of my long life, which would affect me a lot. This goes for other people too; relationships would seem much more precious because of how short they are for me. I’d care a lot more and be ready to protect my friends because their lives would seem so temporary to me. I would still seek close relationships of course, they’d just seem much more fragile and precious to me. I would probably not have children though I don’t plan on it anyways, but outliving them would make me sad. Either way if I want to have children in the future it wouldn’t matter that much how long I lived. I would take my health seriously until I get old enough that a normal person would’ve died; then I’d be more reckless since if I die, it’ll just be the same as if I never had the experimental drug. I would enjoy a longer life which sates my curiosity, allows me to take my time, and allows me to spend more time doing things I love and trying new things. However, a longer life span would mean outliving those I love— and as a result having to deal with much more grief and loss than if I lived a normal lifespan. Longer lifespans would give more of the human experience; an experience full of every range of emotions. If I were to live 150 years rather than 90 or so, the only difference would be that I experience more of both grief and happiness; that I go through more losses and more joys, more ups and more downs, than normal. But to some the human experience, even with all of the losses, would be worth living even a little longer. This thought experiment provides a lesson about fragility of human lives, and how that makes lives seem much more precious and important. It also provides the question of what the human experience truly is— a rollercoaster with ups and downs, no matter how long it is. In my opinion, something worth having in any way possible.
You're is the answer since it stands for 'you are'
